The decision came after Paresh Salgaoncar and five relatives were struck from the electoral roll in Goa's Santa Cruze constituency. The family had moved to a new house during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) and submitted Form 8 to update their address. Instead, the ERONET system flagged errors because their EPICs could not be located and the applications were rejected. The assistant electoral registration officer then informed them that their EPICs had already been deleted, leaving the family without a voting right. Salgaoncar said the only option the officials offered was to file a fresh Form 6, which he argued was illegal because he was already an enrolled voter.
The bench of Justices Amit S Jamsandekar and Valmiki Menezes made clear that a draft roll cannot become the basis for deletion. 'The system cannot override statutory provisions,' the court observed. 'An electoral registration officer must apply his mind and verify that a person has truly moved before deleting a name.' The court also questioned the Election Commission's authority to remove names without giving affected voters an opportunity to be heard, citing the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
The ruling raises the specter of thousands of voters being inadvertently removed during the nationwide SIR exercise. The court warned that if the same glitch occurs across states, 'lakhs will go off the rolls.' The commission is currently revising rolls in phases, with Andhra Pradesh extending its notice period to October 10 and Meghalaya pushing final publication to October 26. Salgaoncar, who now sits on the sidelines of his community, said he fears others in similar situations will be left disenfranchised.
The Bombay High Court ordered the Election Commission to reinstate the six deleted names immediately and to issue a written procedural guideline for handling Form 8 submissions. The commission is expected to file a response by Friday, and the court will review compliance in the coming weeks. If the guidelines are not adopted, the court warned it could intervene further to protect voters' rights.